Nation/World

Here’s who’s been ousted from FBI and Justice Department so far. Democrats say the purge may expand.

Emil Bove, left, listens as Todd Blanche and Donald Trump appear virtually for Trump's sentencing in his hush money case at the Manhattan criminal court on Jan 10. Bove, who was one of Trump's defense lawyers, is now the acting deputy attorney general. (MUST CREDIT: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

Top Senate Democrats on Monday tried to challenge major changes at the Justice Department and FBI, demanding to know whether President Donald Trump’s nominees to lead the agencies played a role in the recent removal or reassignment of law enforcement officials and suggesting that a purge of senior leaders might continue.

In a letter to the acting attorney general and acting FBI director, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee said the apparent demotions of some officials and the ouster of others presented an “alarming threat to national security.”

“As America faces a heightened threat landscape, these shocking removals and reassignments deprive DOJ and the FBI of experienced, senior leadership and decades of experience fighting violent crime, espionage, and terrorism,” read the letter signed by the panel’s ranking Democrat, Sen. Dick Durbin (Illinois), and the committee’s nine other Democrats.

Durbin wrote that he had received “credible information” indicating that at least 25 FBI special agents in charge might be removed this week, in addition to at least four who were removed in recent days, and that a loyalty test was being implemented in the leadership hiring process that involved questions about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The Democrats asked acting attorney general James McHenry and acting FBI director Brian Driscoll for a list of all employees who have been reassigned or removed, as well as records involving their communications with attorney general nominee Pam Bondi and FBI director nominee Kash Patel - both of whom are awaiting Senate confirmation - and other top Justice Department leaders.

Durbin’s office didn’t respond to requests for more details about the information he said he had received about changes at the agencies. The FBI declined to comment, and the Justice Department didn’t respond to requests.

Both agencies have been roiled with anxiety over the past two weeks, as many prosecutors, supervisors and senior officials have been ousted or transferred to new positions and as the FBI has begun a broad examination of every agent and employee involved in the massive investigation of the Capitol riot.

ADVERTISEMENT

At Justice, those transferred to less-desirable roles include top officials in the national security, civil rights, antitrust and criminal divisions. Although many have no background in immigration law, they were given the option of going to a newly created division focused on sanctuary cities and immigration enforcement - or quitting.

Some targeted for transfer, such as the senior official overseeing public corruption and politically sensitive investigations, opted to resign.

Those fired outright include leaders at the Justice Department’s immigration courts, as well as dozens of prosecutors who investigated Trump and the rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6.

At the FBI, at least eight senior officials are being forced out on orders from the Justice Department, according to a memo sent by acting deputy attorney general Emil Bove late last week. They include leaders who oversaw intelligence, national security, cyber-investigations, and the bureau’s science and technology branch.

Some had run FBI field offices in major cities such as Miami and Washington. All had been promoted under then-FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, who resigned in the final days of the Biden administration after Trump said he would cut short Wray’s 10-year term and fire him.

More firings could be imminent.

FBI leaders have told their workforce that the examination of the Jan. 6 cases, as well as of the investigations of Trump’s handling of classified documents and efforts to block the 2020 election results, could lead to widespread personnel actions.

The warnings prompted a letter to Bove late Sunday from a team of high-profile lawyers, threatening legal action against any personnel moves that do not give federal employees due process. On Monday, before Durbin’s letter was issued, several organizations representing current and former FBI agents urged Congress to get involved.

“We are requesting your assistance in ensuring that the men and women of the FBI can continue to effectively protect our country,” said the letter to congressional leadership from the heads of the FBI Agents Association, the Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. “We urge you to work with President Trump to prevent acting officials from taking personnel actions that undermine our shared goal of keeping the FBI out of politics. It is imperative that FBI Special Agents can continue their critical work, free from fear of retaliation, and focused on safeguarding our nation.”

Experts interviewed last week said removing federal employees because of work they did on cases to which they were assigned would amount to retaliation and would be open to legal challenge.

Under standard FBI procedures, agents are entitled to receive any proposed punishments or disciplinary determinations against them in writing before they are finalized, and are granted an opportunity to respond in proceedings before a deciding officer. If they choose, they can hire legal representation and appeal findings against them.

Patel, Trump’s pick for FBI director, committed to following that process during his confirmation hearing last week. He also told senators he had no knowledge of any plans for a purge of bureau agents.

Bondi, the president’s nominee for attorney general, vowed during her hearing that there would “never be an ‘enemies list’” at the Department of Justice.

In the letters terminating the prosecutors who worked on Trump investigations led by special counsel Jack Smith, the acting attorney general said he didn’t trust them in “faithfully implementing” the president’s agenda because they had helped prosecute him. McHenry said he was removing them from service “pursuant to” Article II of the Constitution, which outlines the executive branch and presidential powers.

“They’re being let go simply because of the cases they were handling - that’s unheard of and smells of pure retaliation,” said Mark Gaston Pearce, a former chairman of the National Labor Relations Board who was appointed by President Barack Obama.

Pearce and other experts said the move appears to clash with long-standing civil service regulations. Federal law protects career government employees against termination for political reasons, and it provides a pathway for appeal if they are fired.

In most cases, any federal agency seeking to fire a career employee must provide the employee 30 days notice, along with a written explanation listing its reasons and evidence supporting the decision.

ADVERTISEMENT

Fired employees can appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board, an independent agency that reviews terminations and other adverse actions on behalf of civil servants. The board’s administrative law judges have 120 days to issue a decision, though it’s common for that deadline to be pushed back.

Further appeals go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has jurisdiction over federal personnel decisions.

It’s almost impossible to fast-track this process, which typically must be exhausted before employees can take their claims elsewhere, Pearce said. The merit board went years without a quorum during the first Trump administration, resulting in a huge backlog of cases that has only recently been cleared out.

Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, a nonpartisan nonprofit that advocates for more effective government, said he believed the fired prosecutors had a high likelihood of winning if they appealed, but he noted that the process can be long, stressful and costly.

“They may well be able to get damages later on, but that’s not likely to make them whole, and the experience itself is extraordinarily challenging,” he said.

Stier said firing the prosecutors could have a chilling effect not only on remaining Justice Department prosecutors but on other federal law enforcement officials who are tasked with pursuing cases based on the strength of the evidence, regardless of who the defendant is.

“It undermines the whole system of rule of law and our prosecution system because now you have prosecutors who have to be looking over their shoulder,” Stier said. “It’s incredibly damaging to the basic premise that prosecutors should pursue cases without fear or favor.”

Michael Fallings, an employment lawyer at the law firm Tully Rinckey, said he would expect the Trump administration to contend that it had the right to fire the officials and that their work on Smith’s team showed they could not follow instructions in the new administration. But he said that would probably prove a feeble defense in an appeal.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Just because you cite the Constitution doesn’t mean you can fire these individuals,” Fallings said. “I think the administration would have a tough argument defending against the due process rights that these employees have.”

In the meantime, Fallings said, the prosecutors have almost certainly lost access to their offices and had their security privileges revoked. He said he would advise a client in their situation to file an appeal “as quickly as possible to show that we’re challenging this.”

ADVERTISEMENT